.

The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
July 26, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32760
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of benefits
and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 1996 welfare
reform law (P.L. 104-193). This report responds to some frequently asked questions about TANF;
it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal
Requirements, by Gene Falk).
TANF Funding. TANF provides fixed funding to states, the bulk of which is provided in a $16.5
billion-per-year basic block grant. States are required in total to contribute, from their own funds,
at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement. The basic block grant is
not adjusted for inflation or changes in the cash welfare caseload (see “The Caseload,” below). It
has lost 26% of its value to inflation from FY1997 through FY2010. P.L. 111-291 funds TANF
through the end of FY2011. President Obama’s FY2012 budget proposal would continue TANF
funding, except contingency funds, at its FY2006 through FY2010 levels through FY2012.
State Spending. Though TANF is best known for funding cash welfare payments for needy
families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and
activities. In FY2009, expenditures on basic assistance (cash welfare) totaled $9.3 billion—28%
of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also contributes funds for child care and services
for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected.
Cash Welfare Caseload. In December 2010, the number of families receiving TANF cash
welfare was 1.9 million families, consisting of 4.7 million recipients, of which 3.5 million were
children. The cash welfare caseload is very heterogeneous. The type of family historically thought
of as the “typical” cash welfare family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for
less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2008. Additionally, 15% of cash welfare families
had an employed adult, while almost half of all families had no adult recipient. Child-only
families include those with disabled adults receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), adults
who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for children, and families consisting
of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.
Cash Welfare Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 2009, the maximum
monthly benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. Benefits
in all states represent a fraction of poverty-level income. In the median state (Kansas), the
maximum monthly benefit of $429 for a family of three represents 28% of poverty-level income.
Cash Welfare Work Requirements. TANF requires states to engage 50% of all families and
90% of two-parent families in work activities. However, these standards are reduced by caseload
reduction from FY2005. Further, states may get an extra credit against these standards by
spending more than required under the TANF MOE. In FY2009, states achieved an all-family
participation rate of 29.4% and a two-parent rate of 28.3%. That year, eight jurisdictions failed
the all-family standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. States that fail to
meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant.

Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Current Topics ............................................................................................................................ 1
What is TANF’s Current Funding Level?............................................................................... 1
Was TANF Funding Included in the Full-Year Continuing Resolution?.................................. 2
What Does the President’s FY2012 Budget Propose for TANF? ............................................ 2
Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the Current Recession? ............................... 3
How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by the Recession? .......................... 4
May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients? ...................................................... 4
History........................................................................................................................................ 4
When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant
Created?............................................................................................................................. 4
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? .......................................................... 5
Funding and Expenditures........................................................................................................... 5
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? ............................. 5
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ................................................................................... 6
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? .............................................................. 7
The Caseload .............................................................................................................................. 8
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services?....................... 8
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash
Welfare? ............................................................................................................................ 8
How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With Historical
Levels? .............................................................................................................................. 8
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families?........................................................ 9
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? ......... 11
TANF Work Participation Standards.......................................................................................... 13
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ..................................... 13
What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? ....................................... 14

Figures
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009, by Major Benefit and
Service Category...................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare................................................................ 9
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008 .................................................. 10

Tables
Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2011 ...................................................................... 1
Table 2. TANF Funding: FY2011 and FY2012 ............................................................................ 3
Table 3. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars ........................................................ 5
Table 4. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, December 2010 ....................................... 8
Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table 5. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount for a Family Sizes of
Two and Three, July 2009 ...................................................................................................... 11
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 .................................................. 15
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011 ................................................................. 15
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009 ................................. 16
Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008.................... 16
Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category ................................................ 18
Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding .................................................................................. 20
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009 ............................................................ 23
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash
Welfare, December 2010 ....................................................................................................... 24
Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, December 1994, 2008, 2010 ......... 27
Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: December 2010 ................................................................. 29
Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009................................................................. 31

Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables........................................................................................... 15
Appendix B. State Tables .......................................................................................................... 18

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 32

Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Introduction
This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy
access to information and data. This report does not provide information on TANF program rules.
For such information, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk.
For a non-technical overview of TANF, see CRS Report R40946, The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families Block Grant: An Introduction, by Gene Falk. For a discussion of current TANF
legislative issues, see CRS Report R41781, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block
Grant: Issues for the 112th Congress, by Gene Falk.
Current Topics
What is TANF’s Current Funding Level?
The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-291) included a one-year extension of TANF
funding and program authority through the end of FY2011. It generally extended TANF funding
for FY2011 at its FY2010 levels. The bulk of TANF funding is in a basic block grant (state family
assistance grant) that totals $16.5 billion per year. This is the same level of funding as has existed
since the creation of TANF in the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193).
Under current law, two TANF grants are not funded in FY2011 at last year’s levels. P.L. 111-291
limited contingency fund obligations to those that occurred before its date of enactment
(December 8, 2011). Thus, no new additional contingency funds are available for the remainder
of FY2011. P.L. 111-291 also funded supplemental grants only through June 30, 2011 (the end of
the third quarter of FY2011), and provided that they are subject to reduced funding.
Table 1 shows funding for TANF grants for FY2006 through FY2011. The expiration of the
TANF ECF, limiting the TANF regular contingency fund obligations to those that occurred before
the date of enactment of P.L. 111-291, and providing supplemental grant funding for only three
quarters of FY2011 would result in a reduction in overall TANF funding from the FY2008
through FY2010 levels.
Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2011
(Dollars in millions)
2011

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
(enacted)
State family
16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489
assistance grant
Supplemental
grants
319 319 319 319 319 211a
Healthy
150 150 150 150 150 150
marriage/responsible
fatherhood grants
Congressional Research Service
1

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

2011

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
(enacted)
Grants to the
78 78 78 78 78 78
territories
Grants for tribal
8 8 8 8 8 8
work programs
Regular contingency
93 59 428
1,107 212 334b
funds
Emergency

617
4,383

contingency funds
Totals
17,137 17,103 17,472 18,768 21,639 17,270
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS.
a. Preliminary estimate based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
b. Total obligations for the contingency fund before enactment of P.L. 111-291. Information from HHS.
In addition to federal TANF funds, states are required in total to contribute, from their own funds,
at least $10.4 billion per year for TANF-related activities for low-income families with children.
This level of state funding, known as maintenance-of-effort (MOE) funding, was also established
in the 1996 welfare law and has not been changed since then.
Was TANF Funding Included in the Full-Year Continuing
Resolution?
No. The FY2011 appropriation for TANF was provided in the Claims Resolution Act, as
discussed above.
What Does the President’s FY2012 Budget Propose for TANF?
Table 2 shows TANF grants for FY2011 as enacted under current law and under President
Obama’s budget. It also shows President Obama’s budget request for FY2012.
The budget proposes an increase in funding for FY2011 supplemental grants above the currently
enacted level, from $211 million to $319 million, or an increase of $108 million. The budget
would also fund FY2012 supplemental grants at $319 million.
The FY2012 TANF basic block grant would be funded at $16.5 billion, the same level it has been
funded at since TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law. Funding for healthy marriage
and responsible fatherhood programs would be funded at $150 million. The budget proposes no
additional contingency funds for FY2011 but would provide FY2012 funding for the contingency
fund at $612 million. The $612 million is based on an appropriation provided under P.L. 111-242.
Most TANF grants are entitlements to the states. TANF funding has traditionally been included in
authorizing legislation; funding has not been provided in annual appropriations. TANF funding
comes under the rules that apply to mandatory spending. Under budget rules, both the $108
Congressional Research Service
2

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

million funding increase for supplemental grants in FY2011 and the full $319 million for
supplemental grants in FY2012 would require offsets.1
Table 2. TANF Funding: FY2011 and FY2012
(Dollars in millions)
FY2011 (Enacted
President Obama’s
President Obama’s

Claims Resolution Act)
Budget FY2011
Budget FY2012
Basic block grant
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
Supplemental grants
211
319
319
Healthy
150 150 150
marriage/responsible
fatherhood
Grants to the territories
78
78
78
Tribal work grants
8
8
8
Contingency funds
334
334
612
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS.
Notes: The $334 million in contingency funds for FY2011 both under the Claims Resolution Act and under
President Obama’s budget proposal has already been obligated. Under current law and under the proposal, there
are no new contingency funds.
The budget itself does not propose a long-term reauthorization of TANF. Rather, it provides some
“general principles” for reauthorization The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS)
Budget in Brief says
When TANF reauthorization is considered, the Administration would be interested in
exploring with Congress a variety of strategies to strengthen the program’s ability to improve
outcomes for families and children, including helping more parents succeed as workers by
building on the recent successes with subsidized employment, using performance indicators
to drive program improvement; and preparing the program to respond more effectively in the
event of a future economic downturn.
Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the
Current Recession?
The TANF cash welfare caseload has been increasing since the summer of 2008. The caseload hit
its lowest level since 1969 in July 2008, but has increased since then. From July 2008 to
December 2010, the TANF cash welfare caseload increased by 16%, adding about 273,000
families to the benefit rolls.

1 Supplemental grants require offsets to maintain funding at prior year levels because of a provision in TANF law that
directs the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to assume in their
budget baselines that no additional supplemental grants will be made beyond their current funding period. For example
under current law, these agencies are to assume no supplemental grants will be made after June 30, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by
the Recession?
There is no additional, recession-related funding provided in the one-year TANF extension
included in P.L. 111-291 for the remainder of FY2011. Absent additional funding, states will have
to reallocate funds from other block grant activities to finance any cash welfare caseload
increases resulting from the lingering effects of 2007-2009 recession.
Over the period FY2007 to the first quarter of FY2011, states drew $7.1 billion in combined
funds from the TANF regular contingency fund created in the 1996 welfare reform law and the
TANF “Emergency Contingency Fund” (ECF) created in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) to provide extra funding in FY2009 and FY2010. It
expired, as originally scheduled, on September 30, 2010.
Not all these contingency funds financed cash welfare caseload increases. Regular contingency
funds helped pay for increased costs in the wide range of benefits, services, and activities funded
through TANF. The ECF helped pay for increased costs of cash welfare, non-recurrent short-term
aid, and subsidized employment.
May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients?
Yes. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for welfare
recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.)
In addition to this option, the 1996 welfare reform law contained two other provisions related to
drug abuse and TANF applicants or recipients. The law established a lifetime ban on eligibility
for TANF and food stamps for those convicted of a drug-related felony. However, states may
either opt out entirely or modify and limit this lifetime ban. (See Section 115 of P.L. 104-193.)
Further, TANF allows states to establish Individual Responsibility Plans (IRPs) for their TANF
families. The IRP may require participation in a substance abuse treatment program. A family
may be sanctioned for failure to comply with its IRP.
History
When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant Created?
The TANF block grant was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193). TANF replaced the program of
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which dated back to the Social Security Act of
1935, and several other related programs.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law?
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) included provisions establishing “welfare-to-
work” grants for FY1998 and FY1999 and made several other policy and technical changes to
TANF. No new welfare-to-work grants were made after FY1999.
The original funding authority for TANF ended on September 30, 2002. Over the four-year period
from 2002 through 2005, Congress considered, but did not pass, legislation to modify and
reauthorize TANF (see CRS Report RL33418, Welfare Reauthorization in the 109th Congress: An
Overview, by Gene Falk, Melinda Gish, and Carmen Solomon-Fears). Over this four-year period,
Congress passed 12 “temporary extensions” of TANF and related programs as stop-gap measures
until it could reach agreement on a longer-term reauthorization. (See Appendix A, Table A-1 for
a listing of the temporary extensions.)
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) includes a long-term extension of
funding for TANF through FY2010. It also modified TANF work participation standards;
established $100 million per year in TANF research and technical assistance funds for “healthy
marriage promotion” initiatives; and provided $50 million per year for “responsible fatherhood
initiatives.” (For a discussion of TANF provisions in the DRA, see CRS Report RS22369, TANF,
Child Care, Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.)
Funding and Expenditures
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because
of Inflation?
From FY1997 (the first full year of TANF funding) through FY2010 (ended September 30, 2010),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 26%. On the basis of the January 2011
inflation projections of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the block grant would decline in
value by 28% from FY1997 through FY2011.
Table 3. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars
Value of the Block
Cumulative Loss
Grant in Billions of
of Value
Fiscal Year
FY1997 Dollars
in Percent
1997 16.5
0
1998 16.2 -2%
1999 15.9 -3%
2000 15.4 -6%
2001 14.9 -9%
2002 14.7 -11%
2003 14.4 -13%
2004 14.1 -15%
Congressional Research Service
5

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Value of the Block
Cumulative Loss
Grant in Billions of
of Value
Fiscal Year
FY1997 Dollars
in Percent
2005 13.6 -17%
2006 13.1 -20%
2007 12.8 -22%
2008 12.3 -25%
2009 12.3 -25%
2010 12.1 -26%
2011 11.9 -28%
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Constant dollars were computed using the
Consumer Price Index for al Urban Consumers (CPI-U). Actual inflation was used to compute constant dol ars
for FY1997-FY2010 using data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Constant dollars for FY2011 are based
on the inflation assumptions of the Congressional Budget Office, published in January 2011.
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
TANF is best known as a funding source of cash welfare benefits for needy families with
children. However, states have considerable discretion in using TANF funds, and have used them
for a wide range of benefits and services.
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2009. In
FY2009, a total of $33.5 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most
closely reflects cash welfare, had expenditures of $9.3 billion in FY2009—28% of total TANF
and MOE dollars. All three expenditure categories commonly associated with “welfare” for needy
families with children—basic assistance, administrative costs, and work activities—accounted for
less than half ($14.2 billion or 42%) of all funds.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2009, 18% of all TANF funds used were
either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the Child Care and
Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system,
which provides foster care, adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either
have experienced or are at risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect. However, TANF’s
accounting system does a poor job of capturing expenditures associated with spending on the
child welfare system.2 Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all
“other” expenditure category.

2 For a discussion of the shortcomings of TANF financial data reporting, see the U.S. Government Accountability
Office, Better Information Needed to Understand Trends in States’ Uses of the TANF Block Grant, GAO-06-414,
March 2006. For an estimate of TANF’s contribution to child welfare agencies’ funding, see Scarcella et al, The Cost of
Protecting Vulnerable Children V, Urban Institute, May 2006.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009,
by Major Benefit and Service Category
Total federal and state MOE funds used—$33.5 billion (dollars in billions)
Basic Assistance,
$9.3
Other, $10.9
Administration,
$2.5
Other Work
Supports, $2.6
Work Programs,
$2.4
Child Care, $5.9

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
See Appendix A, Table A-3 for percentages of total federal TANF and state MOE funds
associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds,
see Appendix B, Table B-1, and Table B-2.
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
TANF law permits states to “reserve” unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to “save” funds for unexpected
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
At the end of FY2009 (the most recent data available), a total of $3.7 billion of federal TANF
funding had neither been transferred nor spent. However, some of that $3.7 billion represented
funds that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of FY2009, states had made
such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.6 billion. Generally, obligations
are binding commitments to spend, and they come in the form of contracts and grants to provide
benefits and services. However, the definition of “obligation” varies from program to program,
and because TANF essentially consists of 54 different programs (one for each state, the District of
Columbia, and the territories), what constitutes an obligation may vary.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

The remaining $2.1 billion in unspent funds is called the “unobligated balance.” These funds are
available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 in Appendix B shows unspent
TANF funds by state.
The Caseload
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits
and Services?
This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving
only ongoing assistance (generally cash welfare), with no complete reporting on families
receiving other TANF benefits and services. As discussed in a previous section of this report, a
little less than half of all TANF funds are used on activities not considered part of a traditional
“welfare” program. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families
receiving “assistance” are very likely to undercount the number of families receiving any TANF-
funded benefit or service.
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-
Funded Cash Welfare?
Table 4 provides cash welfare caseload information. A total of 1.9 million families, composed of
4.7 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in December 2010. The bulk of the
“recipients” were children—3.5 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance
caseloads, see Table B-4 in Appendix B.
Table 4. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, December 2010
Families 1,947,957
Total Recipients
4,682,609
Children 3,488,716
Adults 1,193,893
Source: Congressional Research Service on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).

How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With
Historical Levels?
The number of families receiving cash welfare peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The
cash welfare caseload fell rapidly in the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law) before
leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in
the late 1990s. Nationally, the caseload began to rise beginning in August 2008.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
welfare, from July 1959 to December 2010.
Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash welfare families by state.
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare
July 1959 to December 2010
6
March 1994
5.1 million
5
4
3
Dec. 2010:
1.9 million
2
July 2008:
1.7 million
1
0
-59
-62
-65
-68
-71
-74
-80
-83
-86
-89
-92
-95
-98
-01
-04
-07
-10
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul-77 Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families?
Historically, the “typical” cash welfare family has been headed by a single parent (usually the
mother) with one or two children. The single parent has also typically been unemployed.
However, the cash welfare caseload decline has occurred together with a major shift in the
composition of the rolls. Today, less than half of all cash welfare families are headed by an
unemployed adult recipient. Almost half of all cash welfare families had no adult recipient at all,
with the adults in the family ineligible for aid and the benefits paid only on behalf of the child
(these are known as “child-only” families). This shift occurred because the caseload decline was
concentrated among the families thought of as the “typical” cash welfare families, and welfare-to-
work efforts have been concentrated on this population.
Figure 3 shows the composition of the cash welfare caseload in FY2008. Families with an
unemployed adult recipient represent 36% of all cash welfare families. Families with an
employed (in a regular job) adult recipient, who receive cash welfare as an earnings supplement,
Congressional Research Service
9

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

comprise an additional 15% of the cash welfare rolls. Within the “child-only” portion of the
caseload, families with a parent (usually a disabled parent) receiving SSI and the children
receiving TANF as a supplement to that benefit represent 11% of the cash welfare caseload.
Families that are made up of children living with a non-parent relative (grandparents, aunts,
uncles, etc.) represent 16% of the cash welfare caseload. Families with adults who were either
sanctioned or time-limited off the rolls (and thus had their family’s benefit reduced) represented
about 6% of all cash assistance families. Families of child citizens living with ineligible parents
who are noncitizens or who have not reported their citizenship status make up 9% of the total
cash welfare caseload. The remainder of the cash welfare caseload represents child recipients for
whom data on the adults they live with are not available.
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008
Child-only/other ,
114,250
Child-only/noncitizen
or unknown
citizenship of parent,
159,447
Family with adult
recipients/ Not
employed, 616,240
Child-only/caretaker
relative, 267,486
Child-only/SSI parent,
183,392
Child-only/Adults(s)
Families with adult
time-limited, 55,843
recipients/At least 1
Child-only/Adult(s)
Employed, 254,284
sanctioned, 43,067

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of the FY2008 TANF National Data Files.
As previously discussed, the composition of the caseload has changed considerably over time.
Table A-4 shows the change in this categorization of families over time.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF
Cash Per Month?
There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family.
(There are also no federal rules that require states to use TANF to pay cash benefits, though all
states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states.
Table 5 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a family of two and a
family of three in July 2009.3 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family
with children. Some states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent
families or “child-only” cases. States also vary their benefits by other factors such as housing
costs and sub-state geography.
Most states base TANF cash benefit amounts on family size, paying larger cash benefits to larger
families on the presumption that they have greater financial needs. The maximum monthly cash
benefit is usually paid to a family that receives no other income (e.g., no earned or unearned
income) and complies with program rules. Families with income other than TANF often are paid
a reduced benefit. Moreover, some families are financially sanctioned for failure to meet a
program requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.
The table also shows the benefit amounts relative to poverty-level income. TANF pays a family in
cash only a fraction of poverty level income (as officially determined and published by the
Department of Health and Human Services). For a family of two, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 2009 varied from $142 per month in Tennessee (12% of poverty-level income) to
$821 per month in Alaska (54% of poverty-level income). For a family of three, the maximum
TANF benefit paid in July 2009 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (11% of poverty-level
income) to $923 per month in Alaska (48% of poverty-level income).
Table 5. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount
for a Family Sizes of Two and Three, July 2009

Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Percent of
Poverty
Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold Dollars
Threshold
Alabama $190
15.6%

$215
14.1%
Alaska 821
54.1

923
48.4
Arizona 220
18.1

278
18.2
Arkansas 162
13.3

204
13.4
California 561
46.2

694
45.5
Colorado 364
30.0

462
30.3

3 States are not required to report to the federal government their cash welfare benefit amounts in either the TANF state
plan (under section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under section 407 of the Social
Security Act). The benefit amounts shown are from the “Welfare Rules Database,” maintained by the Urban Institute
and funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
11

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Percent of
Poverty
Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold Dollars
Threshold
Connecticut 457 37.6

560 36.7
Delaware 270
22.2

338
22.2
District of
336 27.7

428 28.1
Columbia
Florida 241
19.8

303
19.9
Georgia 235
19.4

280
18.4
Hawai 506
36.2

636
36.2
Idaho 309
25.4

309
20.3
Illinois
318 26.2

432 28.3
Indiana 230
18.9

288
18.9
Iowa 361
29.7

426
27.9
Kansas 352
29.0

429
28.1
Kentucky 225
18.5

262
17.2
Louisiana 188
15.5

240
15.7
Maine 363
29.9

485
31.8
Maryland 453
37.3

574
37.6
Massachusetts 531 43.7

633 41.5
Michigan 403
33.2

492
32.2
Minnesota 437
36.0

532
34.9
Mississippi 146
12.0

170
11.1
Missouri 234
19.3

292
19.1
Montana 401
33.0

504
33.0
Nebraska 293
24.1

364
23.9
Nevada 318
26.2

383
25.1
New Hampshire
606
49.9

675
44.2
New Jersey
322
26.5

424
27.8
New Mexico
357
29.4

447
29.3
New York
524
43.1

721
47.3
North Carolina
236
19.4

272
17.8
North Dakota
378
31.1

477
31.3
Ohio 355
29.2

434
28.4
Oklahoma 225
18.5

292
19.1
Oregon 436
35.9

514
33.7
Pennsylvania 316 26.0

403 26.4
Rhode Island
449
37.0

554
36.3
Congressional Research Service
12

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Percent of
Poverty
Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold Dollars
Threshold
South Carolina
215
17.7

271
17.7
South Dakota
482
39.7

539
35.3
Tennessee 142 11.7

185 12.1
Texas 211
17.4

244
16.0
Utah 380
31.3

474
31.1
Vermont 536
44.1

640
41.9
Virginia 254
20.9

320
21.0
Washington 453 37.3

562 36.8
West Virginia
301
24.8

340
22.3
Wisconsin 628
51.7

628 41.2
Wyoming 514
42.3

546
35.8






Maximum 821
54

923
48
Minimum 142
12

170
11
Median 352
29

429
28
Source: Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database, funded by the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS).

TANF Work Participation Standards
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in
work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
number of hours.4 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion
of a state’s caseload, requiring 90% of the state’s two-parent caseload to meet participation
standards. States that fail the TANF work participation standards are at risk of being penalized by
a reduction in their block grant amounts.
However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “caseload reduction credit.”
The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in the caseload. Through FY2006, states were given credit for caseload
declines that occurred since FY1995.

4 Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Beginning in FY2007, states were only credited with caseload declines that have occurred since
FY2005. The FY2007 effective (after-credit) standard is based on caseload declines from FY2005
to FY2006. However, under a regulatory provision, states may get “extra” credit for caseload
reduction if they spend more than required under the TANF MOE. States can exclude those
families funded by state funds in excess of required state spending.
The ARRA temporarily modifies the caseload reduction credit states receive toward their TANF
work participation. The modification is effective for the FY2009 through FY2010 standards. The
ARRA provides that a state’s credit would not be reduced for any caseload increases that occurred
in FY2008 through FY2010.
What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
In FY2009, the national average work participation rate achieved by states for all families was
29.4%. The participation rate within TANF achieved nationwide for the two-parent portion of the
caseload was 28.3%. These rates are well below the statutory target of 50% for all families and
90% for two-parent families. They are also well below the targets even when adjusting for actual
caseload reduction between FY2005 and FY2008. However, only eight jurisdictions failed the all-
family standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. This is because (1) many
states obtained fairly large “extra” credits for spending above the required MOE level; (2) states
were “held harmless” for any caseload increases between FY2007 and FY2008 (based on the
temporary ARRA modification to the caseload reduction credit, noted above); and (3) many states
eliminated two-parent families from their TANF and MOE caseloads. Presumably, many states
aided two-parent families with their own funds.
The jurisdictions that failed to meet the all-family standard were California, the District of
Columbia, Guam, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon, and Puerto Rico. The jurisdictions that failed
to meet the two-parent standard were Alaska, Guam, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and
Rhode Island. States that fail to meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction
in their block grant. States can avoid the penalty by entering into a corrective compliance plan
with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). They can also claim reasonable cause
for failing to meet the penalty. Further, penalties are reduced based on the degree of
noncompliance, and may be reduced by the Secretary of HHS for those states that were
economically needy during FY2009.
See Table B-7 for state-by-state FY2009 work participation rates.


Congressional Research Service
14

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF,
FY2003-FY2006
Public Law
Time Period
Notes
P.L. 107-229
Oct. 1, 2002-Dec. 31, 2002
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 107-294
Jan. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2003
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 108-7
Apr. 1, 2003-June 30, 2003
Extension as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act.
P.L. 108-40
July 1, 2003-Sept. 30, 2003
Free-standing bill that amended the Social Security
Act to extend TANF and related programs.
P.L. 108-89
Oct. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2004
Multipurpose bill that extended programs through
the first half of FY2004.
P.L. 108-210
Apr. 1, 2004-June 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through June 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-262
July 1, 2004-Sept. 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through Sept. 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-308
Oct. 1, 2004- Mar. 31, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Mar. 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-4
Apr. 1, 2005-June 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through June 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-19
July 1, 2005-Sept. 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Sept. 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-68
Oct. 1, 2005-Dec. 31, 2005
Bill to provide extra funding to help states provide
benefits to families affected by Hurricane Katrina,
suspend certain requirements in states affected by
the hurricane, and extend the funding authority for
the programs through December 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-161
Jan. 1, 2006-Mar. 31, 2006
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through March 31, 2006. It
reduced the bonus for reducing out-of-wedlock
births for FY2006-FY2010 to offset the costs of the
temporary extension.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011
Public Law
Time Period
Notes
P.L. 111-242
Oct. 1, 2010-Dec. 3, 2010
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 111-290
Dec. 4, 2010-Dec. 7, 2010
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 111-291
Dec. 8, 2010-Sept. 30, 2011
Extension as part of the Claims Resolution Act of
(except supplemental grants,
2010. It funded supplemental grants only through
Dec 8, 2010 – June 30, 2011)
the first three quarters of FY2011 and at a
reduced rate.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Congressional Research Service
15

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009
Dollars
Percent of

(in billions)
Total Dollars
Basic Assistance
$9.3
27.8%
Administration 2.5
7.4
Work Programs
2.4
7.0
Child Care
5.9
17.5
Other Work Supports
2.6
7.9
Other 10.9
32.4
Totals 33.5
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).


Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008
1988
1994
2008
Family with adult recipients/ not employed
3,136,566
3,798,997
616,240
Families with adult recipients/at least one
243,573
378,621
254,284
employed
Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned
—
—
43,067
Child-only/adults(s) time-limited


55,843
Child-only/SSI parent
59,988
171,391
183,392
Child-only/caretaker relative
188,598
328,290
267,486
Child-only/noncitizen or unknown
47,565
184,397
159,447
citizenship of parent
Child-only/other
71,660
184,567
114,250
Total
3,747,950
5,046,263
1,694,009
As a Percent of All Cash Welfare Families
Family with adult recipients/ not employed
83.7
75.3
36.4
Families with adult recipients/at least one
6.5 7.5
15.0
employed
Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned
0.0
0.0
2.5
Child-only/adults(s) time-limited
0.0
0.0
3.3
Child-only/SSI parent
1.6
3.4
10.8
Child-only/caretaker relative
5.0
6.5
15.8
Child-only/noncitizen or unknown
1.3 3.7 9.4
citizenship of parent
Congressional Research Service
16

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

1988
1994
2008
Child-only/other
1.9
3.7
6.7
Total 100.0
100.0
100.0
Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the 1988 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data
File; the 1994 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data File; and the 2008 TANF National Data File.
Note: For FY2008, the cash welfare caseload includes those whose benefits were funded from TANF dollars as
well as those whose benefits were funded with MOE dollars under SSPs. “Family with an adult, unemployed”
includes families reported as “child-only” who are under a sanction.

Congressional Research Service
17

---

.

Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
Alabama
$42.3 $17.0 $21.5 $7.5 $6.4 $65.1 $159.7
Alaska
31.9 6.0 9.6 30.7 1.3 6.0 85.5
Arizona
138.0 43.6 12.6 57.2 0.7 157.3 409.5
Arkansas
16.5 13.5 25.8 15.5 4.4 65.1 140.9
California 3,509.5
611.6
485.4
1,020.2
205.6
1,051.1
6,883.5
Colorado
51.8 14.2 0.9 30.6 9.8
266.4 373.7
Connecticut
89.3 36.9 18.9 27.3 5.7 326.1 504.2
Delaware
18.2 7.3 0.6 30.9 0.3 5.3 62.5
District
of
Columbia
22.7 12.3 20.5 81.2 3.9 35.7 176.2
Florida
180.0 38.7 65.2 375.5 6.5 375.0
1,040.7
Georgia 55.0
22.1
17.9
22.2
15.7
388.6
521.5
Hawai
70.1 19.4 142.4 33.4 2.8 97.1 365.2
Idaho
5.9 12.0 6.6 8.7 0.1 9.3 42.6
Illinois 61.1 28.2 68.7 490.7 18.7 463.0 1,130.4
Indiana 108.6
30.9
20.3
52.5
31.7
109.0
353.1
Iowa
61.9 10.8 18.5 45.4 18.4 63.8 218.8
Kansas
46.5 11.2 2.1 38.2
46.7 53.3 198.0
Kentucky
117.4 12.8 25.9 83.1 6.4 29.9 275.5
Louisiana
42.8 7.8 9.1 38.2 5.2
148.6 251.7
Maine
74.6 3.9 13.9 18.0
20.1 4.0 134.6
Maryland 107.1
55.5
36.9
31.5
132.9
180.9
544.9
Massachusetts
324.7 44.1 22.8 336.0 87.1 379.3
1,194.0
CRS-18

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
Michigan
336.4 136.2 113.1 174.6 74.6 766.6 1,601.6
Minnesota
90.0 47.5 76.0 119.6
135.6 59.8 528.5
Mississippi
18.9 4.8 28.3 27.2 25.4 24.5 129.1
Missouri
104.5 14.6 23.4 77.6 0.0 139.1 359.2
Montana 16.4
5.9
11.6
9.5
0.0
8.3
51.7
Nebraska
26.4 5.5 21.5 22.5
29.4 0.6 105.7
Nevada
46.7 10.6 5.0 0.0 5.0 62.2 129.5
New
Hampshire
33.9 11.7 9.6 8.0 1.7 23.3 88.1
New
Jersey
181.8 73.3 102.2 107.1 227.0 516.6 1,207.9
New
Mexico
60.1 15.2 15.1 39.0 45.1 26.4 200.8
New York
1,458.0
456.6
181.7
516.0
1,234.4
1,860.2
5,706.9
North
Carolina
89.3 45.0 59.6 237.2 36.0 268.8 735.9
North Dakota
8.5
4.9
3.2
1.0
1.9
16.7
36.3
Ohio
432.0 158.0 46.7 327.2 22.9 385.1
1,372.0
Oklahoma
22.0 20.2 0.2 124.1 22.3 73.2 262.0
Oregon
115.0 27.7 27.4 37.0 8.2 97.8 313.1
Pennsylvania
197.7 77.0 155.5 428.4 36.8 242.4 1,137.9
Rhode
Island
45.2 12.7 7.0 19.8 9.5 31.4 125.7
South
Carolina
40.5 15.7 26.2 4.1 9.9 93.5 189.7
South
Dakota
13.6 3.3 3.8 0.8 0.0 6.2 27.9
Tennessee
127.8 33.1 64.1 95.0 0.0 85.9 405.9
Texas
84.2 92.1 78.3 26.8 1.3 548.3 831.1
Utah
32.8 12.4 32.6 14.0 4.2 39.6 135.5
Vermont
16.9 7.5 0.3 23.9
24.2 13.7 86.5
Virginia
73.8 25.5 54.7 40.2 9.3 78.3 281.8
Washington
318.5 52.0 130.2 216.5 4.0 843.8
1,564.9
CRS-19

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
West
Virginia
31.8 25.7 1.5 28.2
16.9 54.3 158.4
Wisconsin
113.4 26.4 33.5 254.9 24.6 192.1 644.9
Wyoming 11.3
1.7
0.5
5.8
0.4
11.8
31.5








Totals 9,323.5
2,482.7
2,358.8
5,860.6
2,641.0
10,850.2
33,516.8
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
Alabama 26.5%
10.7%
13.4%
4.7%
4.0%
40.7%
100.0%
Alaska 37.3
7.1
11.2
35.9
1.5
7.1
100.0
Arizona 33.7
10.7
3.1
14.0
0.2
38.4
100.0
Arkansas 11.7
9.6
18.3
11.0
3.1
46.2
100.0
California 51.0
8.9
7.1
14.8
3.0
15.3
100.0
Colorado 13.9
3.8
0.3
8.2
2.6
71.3
100.0
Connecticut 17.7
7.3
3.8
5.4
1.1
64.7
100.0
Delaware 29.1
11.7
1.0
49.4
0.4
8.4
100.0
District
of
Columbia 12.9 7.0 11.6 46.1
2.2
20.2
100.0
Florida 17.3
3.7
6.3
36.1
0.6
36.0
100.0
Georgia 10.5
4.2
3.4
4.3
3.0
74.5
100.0
Hawai 19.2
5.3
39.0
9.2
0.8
26.6
100.0
Idaho 13.8
28.2
15.5
20.5
0.3
21.8
100.0
Illinois 5.4
2.5 6.1 43.4 1.7 41.0 100.0
CRS-20

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
Indiana 30.8
8.8
5.7
14.9
9.0
30.9
100.0
Iowa 28.3
4.9
8.5
20.7
8.4
29.2
100.0
Kansas 23.5
5.7
1.1
19.3
23.6
26.9
100.0
Kentucky 42.6
4.6
9.4
30.2
2.3
10.9
100.0
Louisiana 17.0
3.1
3.6
15.2
2.1
59.0
100.0
Maine 55.5
2.9
10.3
13.4
15.0
3.0
100.0
Maryland 19.7
10.2
6.8
5.8
24.4
33.2
100.0
Massachusetts 27.2
3.7
1.9
28.1
7.3
31.8
100.0
Michigan 21.0
8.5
7.1
10.9
4.7
47.9
100.0
Minnesota 17.0
9.0
14.4
22.6
25.7
11.3
100.0
Mississippi 14.6
3.8
21.9
21.0
19.7
19.0
100.0
Missouri 29.1
4.1
6.5
21.6
0.0
38.7
100.0
Montana 31.8
11.4
22.4
18.3
0.0
16.1
100.0
Nebraska 25.0
5.2
20.3
21.3
27.8
0.5
100.0
Nevada 36.1
8.2
3.8
0.0
3.9
48.0
100.0
New Hampshire
38.5
13.2
10.9
9.1
1.9
26.4
100.0
New Jersey
15.0
6.1
8.5
8.9
18.8
42.8
100.0
New Mexico
29.9
7.6
7.5
19.4
22.4
13.2
100.0
New York
25.5
8.0
3.2
9.0
21.6
32.6
100.0
North Carolina
12.1
6.1
8.1
32.2
4.9
36.5
100.0
North Dakota
23.5
13.5
8.8
2.8
5.3
46.1
100.0
Ohio 31.5
11.5
3.4
23.8
1.7
28.1
100.0
Oklahoma 8.4
7.7
0.1
47.4
8.5
28.0
100.0
Oregon 36.7
8.8
8.7
11.8
2.6
31.2
100.0
Pennsylvania 17.4
6.8
13.7
37.6
3.2
21.3
100.0
Rhode Island
36.0
10.1
5.6
15.8
7.6
25.0
100.0
CRS-21

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures
Child Care
Supports
Other Total
South Carolina
21.3
8.3
13.8
2.2
5.2
49.3
100.0
South Dakota
48.9
11.9
13.8
2.9
0.1
22.3
100.0
Tennessee 31.5
8.2
15.8
23.4
0.0
21.2
100.0
Texas 10.1
11.1
9.4
3.2
0.2
66.0
100.0
Utah 24.2
9.2
24.0
10.3
3.1
29.2
100.0
Vermont 19.5
8.7
0.3
27.6
28.0
15.9
100.0
Virginia 26.2
9.1
19.4
14.3
3.3
27.8
100.0
Washington 20.3
3.3
8.3
13.8
0.3
53.9
100.0
West Virginia
20.1
16.2
0.9
17.8
10.7
34.3
100.0
Wisconsin 17.6
4.1
5.2
39.5
3.8
29.8
100.0
Wyoming 35.9
5.4
1.6
18.3
1.1
37.6
100.0








Totals 27.8
7.4
7.0
17.5
7.9
32.4
100.0
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
CRS-22

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009
September 30, 2009; dollars in millions
State
Obligated but Unspent
Unobligated and Unspent
Total Unspent
Alabama $4.8
$26.8
$31.7
Alaska 0.0
58.3
58.3
Arizona 21.5
0.0
21.5
Arkansas 2.6
56.8
59.3
California 370.7 0.0
370.7
Colorado 0.0
76.6
76.6
Connecticut 0.0 0.0 0.0
Delaware 0.0
4.6
4.6
District of Columbia
3.3
35.4
38.8
Florida 26.3
6.9
33.2
Georgia 59.2
33.4
92.6
Hawai 19.4
48.4
67.8
Idaho 12.3
0.0
12.3
Illinois 0.0
0.0
0.0
Indiana 53.4
0.0
53.4
Iowa 6.4
22.3
28.7
Kansas 0.0
44.7
44.7
Kentucky 0.0
48.8
48.8
Louisiana 23.6 0.0
23.6
Maine 0.0
-0.3
-0.3
Maryland 11.6
79.1
90.8
Massachusetts 3.0 0.0 3.0
Michigan 0.0
244.7
244.7
Minnesota 0.0
103.4
103.4
Mississippi 9.9
18.6
28.5
Missouri 0.0
0.0
0.0
Montana 0.4
44.8
45.1
Nebraska 0.1
43.0
43.1
Nevada 0.0
11.3
11.3
New Hampshire
0.0
17.5
17.5
New Jersey
103.1
12.8
115.9
New Mexico
43.8
0.0
43.8
New York
317.4
311.2
628.7
North Carolina
196.2
3.5
199.7
Congressional Research Service
23

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

State
Obligated but Unspent
Unobligated and Unspent
Total Unspent
North Dakota
0.0
16.3
16.3
Ohio 48.2
0.0
48.2
Oklahoma 41.7 0.0
41.7
Oregon 0.0
0.0
0.0
Pennsylvania 61.0 119.9 180.9
Puerto Rico
2.1
20.8
22.9
Rhode Island
0.0
0.0
0.0
South Carolina
0.0
40.0
40.0
South Dakota
0.0
19.9
19.9
Tennessee 0.0
147.6
147.6
Texas 128.8
0.0
128.8
Utah 0.0
91.9
91.9
Vermont 0.0
0.0
0.0
Virginia 0.8
19.9
20.7
Washington 0.0
131.4
131.4
West Virginia
0.0
63.0
63.0
Wisconsin 11.4 0.0
11.4
Wyoming 2.7
41.8
44.5




Totals 1,585.6
2,065.1
3,650.7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving
TANF Cash Welfare, December 2010
Total
State Families
Recipients
Children Adults
Alabama 24,212
59,569
43,819
15,750
Alaska 3,572
9,767
6,648
3,119
Arizona 19,366
44,103
31,709
12,394
Arkansas 8,632
19,724
13,997
5,727
California 601,226
1,480,156
1,144,238
335,918
Colorado 8,064
21,364
16,319
5,045
Connecticut 16,750
33,360
23,446
9,914
Delaware 5,754
16,455
10,208
6,247
District of Columbia
6,122
14,437
11,417
3,020
Congressional Research Service
24

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Total
State Families
Recipients
Children Adults
Florida 58,144
107,027
85,930
21,097
Georgia 20,686
39,122
35,006
4,116
Guam 1,260
2,994
2,233
761
Hawai 10,136
30,147
20,256
9,891
Idaho 1,858
2,881
2,640
241
Illinois
27,177 78,766
66,424 12,342
Indiana 31,461
75,880
56,890
18,990
Iowa 21,100
54,462
36,968
17,494
Kansas 15,647
40,454
27,134
13,320
Kentucky 31,336
64,352
50,280
14,072
Louisiana 11,117
25,427
21,326
4,101
Maine 15,448
40,045
26,053
13,992
Maryland 26,160
63,973
46,116
17,857
Massachusetts 51,179
100,509
67,009
33,500
Michigan 67,596
177,079
126,627
50,452
Minnesota 24,726
54,213
40,691
13,522
Mississippi 12,078
25,555
18,646
6,909
Missouri 39,606
95,727
65,407
30,320
Montana 3,694
9,354
6,547
2,807
Nebraska 8,445
20,869
16,309
4,560
Nevada 11,066
28,559
21,058
7,501
New Hampshire
6,168
13,300
9,458
3,842
New Jersey
35,330
84,509
58,934
25,575
New Mexico
21,664
57,085
40,610
16,475
New York
158,133
396,204
286,712
109,492
North Carolina
23,639
45,323
38,176
7,147
North Dakota
1,931
4,944
3,731
1,213
Ohio 103,513
238,143
171,630
66,513
Oklahoma 9,471
21,614
17,415
4,199
Oregon 32,884
86,785
58,865
27,920
Pennsylvania 59,034
144,067
106,410
37,657
Puerto Rico
14,615
39,764
26,495
13,269
Rhode Island
6,778
15,950
11,003
4,947
South Carolina
19,038
45,275
33,776
11,499
South Dakota
3,290
6,876
5,756
1,120
Tennessee 63,149
162,182
117,038
45,144
Congressional Research Service
25

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Total
State Families
Recipients
Children Adults
Texas 52,972
121,938
103,832
18,106
Utah 5,716
14,635
10,365
4,270
Vermont 3,335
7,767
5,357
2,410
Virgin Islands
511
1,489
1,070
419
Virginia 37,105
82,885
58,655
24,230
Washington 69,805
169,887
118,085
51,802
West Virginia
10,676
24,422
17,392
7,030
Wisconsin 25,270
60,611
46,079
14,532
Wyoming 312
624
521
103





Totals 1,947,957
4,682,609
3,488,716
1,193,893
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS).

Congressional Research Service
26

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance,
December 1994, 2008, 2010





Percentage Change
Dec 1994
Dec 2007
Dec 2009
to Dec
to Dec
to Dec.

Dec-94 Dec-07 Dec-09 Dec-10 2010
2010
2010
Alabama
47,903 18,584 20,902 24,212 -49.5 30.3 15.8
Alaska
12,370 2,989 3,082 3,572 -71.1 19.5 15.9
Arizona
72,158 37,122 38,513 19,366 -73.2 -47.8 -49.7
Arkansas 25,047 8,741 9,062 8,632 -65.5 -1.2 -4.7
California 923,358 477,465 570,889 601,226
-34.9
25.9
5.3
Colorado 40,244 9,094 11,445 8,064 -80.0 -11.3 -29.5
Connecticut 60,965 19,424 17,409 16,750 -72.5 -13.8
-3.8
Delaware 11,227 3,997 4,915 5,754 -48.7 44.0 17.1
District of
27,420 5,237 9,626 6,122 -77.7 16.9 -36.4
Columbia
Florida
238,564 48,608 61,097 58,144 -75.6 19.6
-4.8
Georgia
141,154 22,740 21,444 20,686 -85.3
-9.0
-3.5
Guam 2,088
NR
2,522
1,260
-39.7


NR
-50.0
Hawai 21,489
6,621
9,870
10,136
-52.8
53.1
2.7
Idaho
8,953 1,527 1,706 1,858 -79.2 21.7 8.9
Illinois
241,091 20,562 21,828 27,177 -88.7 32.2 24.5
Indiana
69,933 31,103 37,298 31,461 -55.0
1.2 -15.6
Iowa
38,022 19,762 21,427 21,100 -44.5
6.8
-1.5
Kansas
28,838 12,853 14,606 15,647 -45.7 21.7
7.1
Kentucky 76,824 29,323 30,243 31,336 -59.2
6.9
3.6
Louisiana
82,792 11,106 11,269 11,117 -86.6
0.1
-1.3
Maine
22,025 12,235 14,384 15,448 -29.9 26.3
7.4
Maryland
80,890 20,466 25,594 26,160 -67.7 27.8
2.2
Massachusetts
105,769 52,473 60,776 51,179 -51.6
-2.5 -15.8
Michigan 209,695 69,327 70,138 67,596 -67.8
-2.5
-3.6
Minnesota 61,343 26,387 22,887 24,726 -59.7
-6.3
8.0
Mississippi 53,221 11,631 12,624 12,078 -77.3
3.8
-4.3
Missouri
91,802 39,054 39,635 39,606 -56.9
1.4
-0.1
Montana 11,660 3,192 3,869 3,694 -68.3 15.7 -4.5
Nebraska 15,427 7,515 8,950 8,445 -45.3 12.4 -5.6
Nevada 15,559
7,410
10,070
11,066
-28.9
49.3 9.9
New
11,078 4,497 6,161 6,168 -44.3 37.2 0.1
Hampshire
Congressional Research Service
27

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ






Percentage Change
Dec 1994
Dec 2007
Dec 2009
to Dec
to Dec
to Dec.

Dec-94 Dec-07 Dec-09 Dec-10 2010
2010
2010
New
Jersey 113,293 34,175 33,686 35,330 -68.8
3.4
4.9
New
Mexico 34,854 12,195 19,747 21,664 -37.8 77.6
9.7
New
York 463,692 155,798 156,735 158,133
-65.9
1.5
0.9
North
128,848 24,544 25,676 23,639 -81.7
-3.7
-7.9
Carolina
North
5,309 2,072 2,136 1,931 -63.6 -6.8 -9.6
Dakota
Ohio 236,298
80,629
103,690
103,513
-56.2
28.4
-0.2
Oklahoma 45,893 8,951 9,858 9,471 -79.4 5.8 -3.9
Oregon
39,967 19,299 29,373 32,884 -17.7 70.4 12.0
Pennsylvania 208,949 55,389 51,991 59,034 -71.7
6.6 13.5
Puerto
Rico 56,132 12,356 13,577 14,615 -74.0 18.3
7.6
Rhode
Island
22,599 8,349 7,785 6,778 -70.0 -18.8 -12.9
South
50,251 14,428 18,847 19,038 -62.1 32.0
1.0
Carolina
South
Dakota
6,521 2,904 3,269 3,290 -49.5 13.3 0.6
Tennessee 105,616 55,161 62,760 63,149 -40.2 14.5
0.6
Texas
281,011 57,002 51,423 52,972 -81.1
-7.1
3.0
Utah
17,240 5,140 7,071 5,716 -66.8 11.2 -19.2
Vermont
9,707 4,242 3,268 3,335 -65.6 -21.4 2.1
Virgin
Islands
1,264 399 530 511 -59.6 28.1 -3.6
Virginia
74,203 31,041 37,236 37,105 -50.0 19.5
-0.4
Washington 102,603 52,013 68,819 69,805 -32.0 34.2
1.4
West Virginia
39,546
8,725
9,663
10,676
-73.0
22.4
10.5
Wisconsin 73,714 17,788 20,157 25,270 -65.7 42.1 25.4
Wyoming 5,400 265 327 312 -94.2 17.7 -4.6








Totals
4,971,819 1,703,910 1,931,865 1,947,957
-60.8
14.2
0.8
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by
TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dol ars. NR denotes that caseload data were not reported for the month.
Total percentage change for Dec. 2007 to Dec. 2009 exclude Guam, which did not report data for Dec. 2007.


Congressional Research Service
28

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: December 2010
As a Percent of All Families Receiving





Assistance
No
Single
Two-
No
Single
Two-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families Families Families Totals Families
Families
Families Totals
Alabama
8,690
15,371 151
24,212 35.9 63.5 0.6 100.0
Alaska
988
2,115 469
3,572
27.7 59.2 13.1 100.0
Arizona
7,912
10,784 670
19,366 40.9 55.7 3.5 100.0
Arkansas
3,109
5,305 218
8,632 36.0 61.5 2.5 100.0
California 259,243
281,339
60,644
601,226
43.1 46.8 10.1 100.0
Colorado 3,427
4,195 442
8,064 42.5 52.0 5.5 100.0
Connecticut
6,962
9,788 0
16,750
41.6 58.4 0.0
100.0
Delaware 3,032
2,686 36
5,754
52.7 46.7 0.6 100.0
District of
2,261
3,861 0
6,122
36.9 63.1 0.0
100.0
Columbia
Florida 39,954
16,880
1,310
58,144
68.7
29.0
2.3
100.0
Georgia 16,676
4,010 0
20,686
80.6 19.4 0.0
100.0
Guam
683 418 159
1,260
54.2 33.2 12.6 100.0
Hawai
1,897
6,007
2,232
10,136
18.7 59.3 22.0 100.0
Idaho
1,674
184 0
1,858
90.1 9.9 0.0
100.0
Illinois 14,869 12,308
0 27,177 54.7 45.3 0.0 100.0
Indiana 9,683
19,565
2,213
31,461
30.8
62.2
7.0
100.0
Iowa 5,382
14,650
1,068
21,100
25.5
69.4
5.1
100.0
Kansas 4,194
9,990
1,463
15,647
26.8
63.8
9.4
100.0
Kentucky 18,120
12,470 746
31,336 57.8 39.8 2.4 100.0
Louisiana 7,099
4,018 0
11,117
63.9 36.1 0.0
100.0
Maine
2,477
10,967
2,004
15,448
16.0 71.0 13.0 100.0
Maryland 8,223
17,937 0
26,160
31.4 68.6 0.0
100.0
Massachusetts 17,743 30,995 2,441 51,179 34.7
60.6
4.8
100.0
Michigan 17,214
50,382 0
67,596
25.5 74.5 0.0
100.0
Minnesota
10,937
13,789 0
24,726
44.2 55.8 0.0
100.0
Mississippi 5,227
6,851 0
12,078
43.3 56.7 0.0
100.0
Missouri 8,883
30,723 0
39,606
22.4 77.6 0.0
100.0
Montana 1,394
1,910 390
3,694
37.7 51.7 10.6 100.0
Nebraska 3,786
4,659 0
8,445
44.8 55.2 0.0
100.0
Nevada
4,791
5,117
1,158
11,066
43.3 46.2 10.5 100.0
New
2,502
3,520 146
6,168 40.6 57.1 2.4 100.0
Hampshire
Congressional Research Service
29

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

As a Percent of All Families Receiving





Assistance
No
Single
Two-
No
Single
Two-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families Families Families Totals Families
Families
Families Totals
New
Jersey
9,526
25,804 0
35,330
27.0 73.0 0.0
100.0
New Mexico
7,265
12,791
1,608
21,664
33.5
59.0
7.4
100.0
New York
60,013
95,469
2,651
158,133
38.0
60.4
1.7
100.0
North
16,771
6,590 278
23,639 70.9 27.9 1.2 100.0
Carolina
North
721
1,210 0
1,931
37.3 62.7 0.0
100.0
Dakota
Ohio 46,405
48,854
8,254
103,513
44.8
47.2
8.0
100.0
Oklahoma 5,272
4,199 0
9,471
55.7 44.3 0.0
100.0
Oregon 10,130
19,762
2,992
32,884
30.8
60.1 9.1
100.0
Pennsylvania 21,952
35,986 1,096
59,034 37.2 61.0
1.9 100.0
Puerto
Rico
1,830
12,785 0
14,615
12.5 87.5 0.0
100.0
Rhode
Island 2,255
4,005 518
6,778 33.3 59.1 7.6 100.0
South
7,278
11,760 0
19,038
38.2 61.8 0.0
100.0
Carolina
South
Dakota
2,170
1,120 0
3,290
66.0 34.0 0.0
100.0
Tennessee 12,636
48,787
1,726
63,149 20.0 77.3 2.7 100.0
Texas 35,210
17,762 0
52,972
66.5 33.5 0.0
100.0
Utah
2,667
3,049 0
5,716
46.7 53.3 0.0
100.0
Vermont 1,314
1,636 385
3,335
39.4 49.1 11.5 100.0
Virgin
Islands 22
489 0
511
4.3 95.7 0.0
100.0
Virginia 11,828
25,277 0
37,105
31.9 68.1 0.0
100.0
Washington
25,406
37,297
7,102
69,805
36.4 53.4 10.2 100.0
West
Virginia
4,847
5,829 0
10,676
45.4 54.6 0.0
100.0
Wisconsin 12,163
12,500 607
25,270 48.1 49.5 2.4 100.0
Wyoming 215 90 7
312
68.9 28.8 2.2
100.0









Totals 796,928
1,045,845
105,184
1,947,957
40.9
53.7 5.4
100.0
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by
TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dollars.

Congressional Research Service
30

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009

All Family Standard

Two-Parent Standard
Participation
Met
Participation
Met
State
Rate
Standard?

Rate
Standard?
United States
29.4


28.3







Alabama 32.4
YES

24.7
YES
Alaska 37.2
YES

40.5
NO
Arizona 27.1
YES

62.6
YES
Arkansas 37.1
YES

21.7
YES
California
26.8 NO

28.6 YES
Colorado
37.8 YES

33.3 YES
Connecticut 34.4
YES

NA
NA
Delaware 37.5
YES


NA
NA
Dist. Of Col.
23.5
NO

NA
NA
Florida 46.1
YES

54.4
YES
Georgia 57.1
YES

NA
NA
Guam 0.0
NO

0.0
NO
Hawai 40.3
YES

NA
NA
Idaho 52.0
YES

NA
NA
Illinois 49.3
YES

NA
NA
Indiana 17.5
YES

17.8
YES
Iowa 35.4
YES

27.0
YES
Kansas 23.9
YES

25.6
YES
Kentucky 37.3
YES

35.1
NO
Louisiana 34.4
YES

NA
NA
Maine 16.8
NO

16.6
NO
Maryland 44.0
YES

NA
NA
Massachusetts 47.5
YES

92.8
YES
Michigan 27.9
YES

NA
NA
Minnesota 29.8
YES

NA
NA
Mississippi 67.5
YES

NA
NA
Missouri 13.2
NO

NA
NA
Montana 44.2
YES

58.7
YES
Nebraska 50.3
YES

NA
NA
Nevada 39.4
YES

46.8
NO
New Hampshire
46.5
YES

NA
NA
Congressional Research Service
31

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


All Family Standard

Two-Parent Standard
Participation
Met
Participation
Met
State
Rate
Standard?
Rate
Standard?
New Jersey
20.1
YES

NA
NA
New Mexico
43.1
YES

63.0
YES
New York
33.4
YES

NA
NA
North Carolina
32.3
YES

46.6
YES
North Dakota
61.0
YES

NA
NA
Ohio
23.3 NO

23.1 YES
Oklahoma 23.0
YES

NA
NA
Oregon 9.5
NO

5.9
NO
Pennsylvania 45.8
YES

84.2
YES
Puerto Rico
8.7
NO

NA
NA
Rhode Island
13.8
YES

13.6
NO
South Carolina
45.1
YES

NA
NA
South Dakota
59.4
YES

NA
NA
Tennessee 25.5
YES

0.0
YES
Texas 37.0
YES


NA
NA
Utah 32.6
YES

NA
NA
Vermont
29.0
YES

24.0
YES
Virgin Islands
7.1
YES

NA
NA
Virginia 44.3
YES

NA
NA
Washington 23.0
YES

18.6
YES
West Virginia
19.6
YES

NA
NA
Wisconsin 39.9
YES

33.0
YES
Wyoming 61.3
YES

75.7
YES
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Note: NA denotes not applicable. State did not service two-parent families in its TANF or MOE-funded
programs. NR denotes not reported.

Author Contact Information

Gene Falk

Specialist in Social Policy
gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344


Congressional Research Service
32

---